Diary

#Deflategate is a Disgrace and Cheaters Never Win

deflated_football

I am so absolutely and completely, gaggingly chokingly vomitingly sick of hearing about #Deflategate. It’s a disgrace.  This is just one more proof that our society has fallen into a liberal Chinese finger trap of the brain. The harder we pull against it, the more it cuts off our cerebral circulation. I can feel myself losing intelligence. I can feel it.

I win and you cheated.

That’s what my four year-old says whenever we race from the bedroom to the kitchen, or up and down the driveway, or whatever he decides is now a competition.  He’s learned from his TV shows* that “cheaters never win”, and therefore anyone who doesn’t  win, must be a cheater.  And even if you do cheat, if you win, you haven’t cheated, because winners never cheat.

My son has summed up liberal thought perfectly.

In his four year-old brain, he’s failed to make the leap that winning by cheating robs you of the win, and that it’s possible to lose, yet lose honorably.  To liberals, there’s no honor in losing, and there’s no shame in winning, no matter how the win is achieved.  “By hook or by crook,” is the correct saying.  Painting the winner as a cheater is as good as winning if you can’t win by cheating yourself, by liberal thinking.

Jim Antle at the Daily Caller wrote about how DeflateGate relates to life and politics, because if you believe that Brady cheated to beat Indianapolis by deflating footballs by 1 PSI, the liberals have gotten inside your brain.

I can already hear you saying, “Wait a minute, Antle. I’m no liberal. I’m a true-blue red-state American and I just don’t like the cut of Brady’s cheating-assed jib.”

The liberals have gotten to you anyway. They know you don’t like Boston, the city closest to where Brady plays, or California, where the quarterback is from. You might not even like Michigan, where Brady went to college.

The same politics of envy that liberals exploit to make some people crave tax increases on the wealthy has turned you against the winningest quarterback of our time, a hero to the blue-collar and culturally conservative parts of the Bay State, a true Patriot.

I am disqualified from saying too much about the Patriots.  See, I liked the Pats when Steve Grogan was quarterback (arguably the losingest winning quarterback in history).  I liked them way before that:  when Jim Plunkett, #16, was quarterback—before he went on to be the Super Bowl MVP for Oakland.  Then post-Grogan, I liked them when Tony Eason, Doug Flutie, Hugh Millen, and Drew Bledsoe—a bridesmaid, never a bride—tossed the pigskin.  By the time superstar Tom Brady came around, the pent-up loser, close-but-no-cigar feeling had gone critical, almost to the point of baseball’s Chicago Cubs.  The exquisite joy of having a fifteen year “dynasty” for the Pats as winners is too much for me to hold back, so you could say I’m a bit biased.

I will say this:  Deflategate has been covered better than any political scandal, with hours upon hours of analysis, speculation, commentary, and plain venom, to overflow the two week vacuum between the NFC/AFC championship games and the Super Bowl.  And it’s still going on:  even Bill Nye (the Science Guy) chipped in; SI tackled the “legal ramifications of Bill Belichick’s Deflategate comments”; and the Washington Post featured SNL’s skit lampooning Belichick and Brady’s press conference.  Seriously.

CNN’s Jake Tapper ran a pseudo-scientific “squishiness test” where his producer, Jason, was blindfolded and given two footballs at a time, to see if he could tell which one was squishy.  Of course, he was right both times.  In the studio, at room temperature, comfortably wearing a black pullover.  Jason’s qualification:  “he plays a lot of football”.  Of course Tom Brady should be able to discern a 1 PSI difference in driving rain and cold temperatures, only by feel, without a second football to compare against, because, like Jason, he plays a lot of football.

Why all this attention?  Because the great liberal lie that my four year-old clings to has penetrated America to the core:  cheaters never win.

To the liberal media, using a rigged test, or bringing in television personality with zero football experience to prove that the Patriots cheated is fair game.  It’s only cheating if the winner does it.  Or more exactly, it’s only cheating if the winner isn’t the underdog, or I don’t like their politics, or their political un-correctness.  It’s never cheating if the “correct” team wins.

Belichick has cheated before, and therefore he’s a cheater forever.  He can’t win.  Even if the Patriots win, it has to be tarnished, discredited, marred with an asterisk “*underinflated footballs” forever.  As Antle wrote about Tom Brady:  “[you] don’t hate him because he cheats. You hate him because he wins. If he’s exposed in the current NFL probe, that’s something you’ll love.”

Liberals love to see the mighty fall.  They hone Schadenfreude into an art form, but only when it affects those they already despise.  Liberals would rather defend losing ideas than admit that winning ideas are simply better.  For example, the rich liberal elite can’t justify their money unless they espouse socialism.  Even though socialism is a totally discredited doctrine that has always resulted in tyranny, poverty, and despotism, they cling to it, because otherwise they’d have to admit that they got rich the same way other capitalists did:  they inherited, invested, or exploited some skill or special relationship.

Cheaters never win, so liberals double-cheat:  they embrace a failed ideology and pretend their money is only to bless the less fortunate, while painting other wealthy people, who earn their wealth legitimately, as cheaters.  In politics, the Republicans are cheaters if they change Senate rules on filibusters, yet Democrats do it to win without scrutiny.

There’s great tension in the grey matter of Massachusetts residents right now, because their liberal thought patterns are programmed to condemn the winners when they’re branded as cheaters.  Yet their love for the Patriots causes them to rise to their team’s defense.  I’m sure that if Brady wins another Super Bowl ring by defeating Seattle, there’ll be a chorus of “I’m sorry we had to win this way” coming from that corner.  If it were possible to win by losing, many liberal Pats fans would prefer this to unadulterated victory.

Because to the liberal, and the four year-old, it’s always I win and you cheated.

*TV shows for little kids like Blaze and the Monster Machines feature villains like “Crusher”, who always cheat and never win.  When I was growing up, we used to root for the coyote, not the road runner, but loved to see the coyote get hammered, or fall 2000 feet to just get up and try again.  When the road runner hovered in the air while the coyote fell—the coyote held up a sign “I wouldn’t mind—except that he defies the law of gravity!” to which the road runner’s sign replied “Sure—but I never studied law”.  So it is with liberals and children.

P.S.  I think the whole thing about under inflated footballs is simply a red herring.  I agree with Jason La Canfora of CBS Sports, and Rich Gannon.  NFL quarterbacks want the football they way they want it—nobody is deflating balls.  It’s just another thing that the rulebook mavens at the NFL will cover for next year when the side judges and referees start carrying portable, calibrated air pressure gauges in their pockets, and head coaches can call a “ball check” time out.  But then again, I’m biased.